IMPORTANCE Treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) with buprenorphine decreases opioid use and prevents morbidity and mortality. Emergency departments (EDs) are an important setting for buprenorphine initiation for patients with untreated OUD; however, readiness varies among ED clinicians. OBJECTIVE To characterize barriers and facilitators of readiness to initiate buprenorphine for the treatment of OUD in the ED and identify opportunities to promote readiness across multiple clinician types.

ED-initiated buprenorphine was associated with increased engagement in addiction treatment and reduced illicit opioid use during the 2-month interval when buprenorphine was continued in primary care. Outcomes at 6 and 12 months were comparable across all groups.

The emergency department (ED) has long been recognized as providing critical access to the health care system for many, yet only in the past few decades has the ED visit been recognized as an opportunity to identify and link patients to care for substance use disorders (SUDs). This review explores the evidence for ED-based screening, psychosocial and pharmacological interventions, and linkage to treatment for the spectrum of SUDs including high risk alcohol use and alcohol, opioid, tobacco and other SUDs. Despite knowledge gaps, methodological challenges and some inconsistency across interventions studied, opportunities for EDs to improve the care of patients across the spectrum of SUDs are robust.

provide practical guidance regarding long-term care for these patients. Research to expand our options for nonopioid pain relief in patients with cancer may lead to a wider array of lower-risk choices for managing chronic pain. The recent announcement from Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, charging the scientific community with developing evidence-based guidelines for prescribing opioids for patients with specific conditions , represents a call to action for the oncology community. Although many cancer survivors live with chronic health issues caused by their treatment, opioid addiction should not be one of them.

IMPORTANCE Emergency departments (EDs) sporadically use a high-dose buprenorphine induction strategy for the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) in response to the increasing potency of the illicit opioid drug supply and commonly encountered delays in access to followup care.OBJECTIVE To examine the safety and tolerability of high-dose (>12 mg) buprenorphine induction for patients with OUD presenting to an ED. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSIn this case series of ED encounters, data were manually abstracted from electronic health records for all ED patients with OUD treated with buprenorphine at a single, urban, safety-net hospital in Oakland, California, for the calendar year 2018. Data analysis was performed from April 2020 to March 2021.INTERVENTIONS ED physicians and advanced practice practitioners were trained on a high-dose sublingual buprenorphine induction protocol, which was then clinically implemented. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESVital signs; use of supplemental oxygen; the presence of precipitated withdrawal, sedation, and respiratory depression; adverse events; length of stay; and hospitalization during and 24 hours after the ED visit were reported according to total sublingual buprenorphine dose (range, 2 to >28 mg). RESULTSAmong a total of 391 unique patients (median [interquartile range] age, 36 [29-48] years), representing 579 encounters, 267 (68.3%) were male and 170 were (43.5%) Black. Homelessness (88 patients [22.5%]) and psychiatric disorders (161 patients [41.2%]) were common. A high dose of sublingual buprenorphine (>12 mg) was administered by 54 unique clinicians during 366 (63.2%)encounters, including 138 doses (23.8%) greater than or equal to 28 mg. No cases of respiratory depression or sedation were reported. All 5 (0.8%) cases of precipitated withdrawal had no association with dose; 4 cases occurred after doses of 8 mg of buprenorphine. Three serious adverse events unrelated to buprenorphine were identified. Nausea or vomiting was rare (2%-6% of cases).The median (interquartile range) length of stay was 2.4 (1.6-3.75) hours. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEThese findings suggest that high-dose buprenorphine induction, adopted by multiple clinicians in a single-site urban ED, was safe and well tolerated in patients with untreated OUD. Further prospective investigations conducted in multiple sites would enhance these findings.

Background and Aims In a recent randomized trial, patients with opioid dependence receiving brief intervention, Emergency Department (ED)-initiated buprenorphine, and ongoing follow up in primary care with buprenorphine (buprenorphine) were twice as likely to be engaged in addiction treatment compared with referral to community-based treatment (referral) or brief intervention and referral (brief intervention). Our aim was to evaluate the relative cost effectiveness of these 3 methods of intervening on opioid dependence in the ED. Design Measured healthcare use was converted to dollar values. We considered a health care system perspective and constructed cost effectiveness acceptability curves that indicate the probability each treatment is cost effective under different thresholds of willingness-to-pay for outcomes studied. Setting An urban ED in the USA. Participants Opioid-dependent patients 18 years or older. Measurements Self-reported 30-day assessment data were used to construct cost effectiveness acceptability curves for patient engagement in formal addiction treatment at 30 days and the number of days illicit opioid free in the past week. Findings Considering only health care system costs, cost effectiveness acceptability curves indicate that at all positive willingness-to-pay values, ED-initiated buprenorphine treatment was more cost-effective than brief intervention or referral. For example, at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $1000 for 30-day treatment engagement, we are 79 percent certain ED-initiated buprenorphine is most cost effective compared with other studied treatments. Similar results were found for days illicit opioid free in the past week. Results were robust to secondary analyses that included patients with missing cost data, included crime and patient time costs in the numerator, and to changes in unit price estimates. Conclusion In the United States, emergency department-initiated buprenorphine intervention for patients with opioid dependence provides high value compared with referral to community-based treatment or combined brief intervention and referral.

Background Patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) frequently present to the emergency department (ED) after overdose, or seeking treatment for general medical conditions, their addiction, withdrawal symptoms, or complications of injection drug use, such as soft tissue infections. ED-initiated buprenorphine has been shown to be effective in increasing patient engagement in treatment compared with brief intervention with a facilitated referral or referral alone. However, adoption into practice has lagged behind need. To address this implementation challenge, we are evaluating the impact of implementation facilitation (IF) on the adoption of ED-initiated buprenorphine for OUD into practice. Methods This protocol describes a study that is being conducted through the National Institute on Drug Abuse’s Center for the Clinical Trials Network. A hybrid type III effectiveness-implementation study design is used to evaluate the effectiveness of a standard educational dissemination strategy versus IF on implementation (primary) and effectiveness (secondary) outcomes in four urban, academic EDs. Sites start with a standard 60-min “Grand Rounds” educational intervention describing the prevalence of ED patients with OUD, the evidence for opioid agonist treatment and for innovative interventions with ED-initiated buprenorphine; followed by a 1-year baseline evaluation period. Using a modified stepped wedge design, sites are randomly assigned to the IF intervention which is guided by the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARiHS) framework to assess evidence, context, and facilitation-related factors impacting the adoption of ED-initiated buprenorphine. During the 6 months of IF through the 1-year IF evaluation period, external facilitators work with local stakeholders to tailor and refine a bundle of activities to meet the site’s needs. The primary analyses compare the baseline evaluation period to the IF evaluation period ( n = 120 patients with untreated OUD enrolled during each period) on (1) rates of provision of ED-initiated buprenorphine by ED providers with referral for ongoing medication (implementation outcome) and (2) rates of patient engagement in addiction treatment on the 30th day after the ED visit (effectiveness outcome). Finally, we will perform a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) to determine if the effectiveness benefits are worth the additional costs. Discussion Results will generate novel information regarding the impact of IF as a strategy to promote ED-initiated buprenorphine. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03023930 first posted 1/10/2017, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03023930?term=0069&rank=1 Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13012-019-0891-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The treatment of opioid use disorder with buprenorphine and methadone reduces morbidity and mortality in patients with opioid use disorder. The initiation of buprenorphine in the emergency department (ED) has been associated with increased rates of outpatient treatment linkage and decreased drug use when compared to patients randomized to receive standard ED referral. As such, the ED has been increasingly recognized as a venue for the identification and initiation of treatment for opioid use disorder, but no formal American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) recommendations on the topic have previously been published. The ACEP convened a group of emergency physicians with expertise in clinical research, addiction, toxicology, and administration to review literature and develop consensus recommendations on the treatment of opioid use disorder in the ED. Based on literature review, clinical experience, and expert consensus, the group recommends that emergency physicians offer to initiate opioid use disorder treatment with buprenorphine in appropriate patients and provide direct linkage to ongoing treatment for patients with untreated opioid use disorder. These consensus recommendations include strategies for opioid use disorder treatment initiation and ED program implementation. They were approved by the ACEP board of directors in January 2021.